Film Recommendations for Exceptional Detail

[rnwhalley]

I have recently become a bit obsessed with turning out the sharpest most detailed images and I would like to get peoples views about film use, specifically B&W.

For this work I will be shooting with an XPan and usually a 45mm lens but sometimes a 90mm. Typically the camera is tripod mounted and the subject matter is landscapes, often of mountains or rock formations with lots of detail. I don't do my own developing but use a lab that takes reasonable care. I then scan the images using a Minolta 5400 before output.

What I am looking for are recommendations of readily available (and resonably priced) films that exhibit very fine grain structure and exceptional sharpness for use in my Landscape work. I have been shooting with Ilford Delta 100 and whilst I like it, I am sure there is better given my requirements and workflow.

Many thanks

[mrred]

Ironically, should should try the BW Colour film. Aside from slide, it is supposed to have quite a bit of detail.

[MikeSeb]

If you like Delta 100, stick with it. You could also try T-Max 100 (100TMX), which is also exceptionally fine-grained, sharp, and contrasty; or its faster sibling T-Max 400 (400TMY-2). The latter is of course 2 stops faster, but has extremely fine grain for its speed.

I use both and like them quite well. They scan beautifully as long as you don't overdevelop. Optimum negatives for scanning should have exposure enough to render important shadow detail, and be developed only enough to keep important highlight detail. Overly dense negatives scan poorly.

[Jordan]

Actually, I think Delta 100 is pretty much ideally suited to your needs. There are other great fine-grain films out there (TMX, Acros, etc.) but none of them are all that much sharper or finer-grained than Delta 100.

[Bruce Watson]

I have recently become a bit obsessed with turning out the sharpest most detailed images and I would like to get peoples views about film use, specifically B&W.

There's detail captured on film, and there's detail in the final print. Which are you trying to maximize? They aren't necessarily the same thing. The print in particular depends on the enlargement level, and the bottom line is, if you want big prints, shoot big film.

If it's just an exercise to see how much information you can pack onto your film, you might try something like Tech Pan. I've never used it and hear it's a PITA, but if it's absolute resolution you are after, that's a possible path.

[mrred]

Don't forget that the developers have a large hand in the sharpness (detail). Developers can work differently film to film.

Sharpness usually comes at a cost of grain (developers dissolve the silver grain). If you want great sharpness and low grain, choose a film with 'disgustingly low grain'. When you develop to be sharp, grain will still be tolerable; that will be your detail.

[rnwhalley]

Thanks, there are some interesting thoughts coming out. I hadn't thought of trying the BW Colour films, I assume you mean the likes of Ilford XP2? I have a few rolls in the freezer so will try to dig them out. T-Max100 is also something I have tried but I seemed to struggle with the scanning because of grain. Having said that, as mmred points out, developers have a lot to do with the sharpness.

My objective is to capture as much detail in the neg as possible as my starting point and I accept the point that big film is best. I also shoot with a Pentax 67 but carrying it and tripod 3,500m up a mountain has started to get to my back, hence why I like the XPan (and it has v.sharp glass).

I had thought about the Kodak Tech Pan but decided not to bother as it's now difficult to get hold of so I would hate to fall in love with it.

Someone else has suggested Ilford Pan F Plus 50 although then commented that it's too contrasty. Does anyone have any experience using this?

I am off to Poland at the weekend so please don't be offended if I am not responding for a while.

Thanks again everyone for your thoughts.

[Don Bryant]

Thanks, there are some interesting thoughts coming out. I hadn't thought of trying the BW Colour films, I assume you mean the likes of Ilford XP2? I have a few rolls in the freezer so will try to dig them out. T-Max100 is also something I have tried but I seemed to struggle with the scanning because of grain. Having said that, as mmred points out, developers have a lot to do with the sharpness.

My objective is to capture as much detail in the neg as possible as my starting point and I accept the point that big film is best. I also shoot with a Pentax 67 but carrying it and tripod 3,500m up a mountain has started to get to my back, hence why I like the XPan (and it has v.sharp glass).

I had thought about the Kodak Tech Pan but decided not to bother as it's now difficult to get hold of so I would hate to fall in love with it.

Someone else has suggested Ilford Pan F Plus 50 although then commented that it's too contrasty. Does anyone have any experience using this?

I am off to Poland at the weekend so please don't be offended if I am not responding for a while.

Thanks again everyone for your thoughts.

ADOX CMS developed in the ADOX developer. It will blow everything else out of the water and your scanning technique and scanner will be stressed, along with your camera optics. Scanned on a drum scanner and the detail and tonality are incredible. Very large prints can be made with no grain and nice tonal transitions. The results are much better and less grainy than TMAX-100 (though I have nothing against this film).

I saw some prints today made with ADOX CMS and shot with Leica ASPH glass and the results easily rivaled 4x5. I don't say this lightly since I'm a LF shooter.

I have also heard from one very credible member of hybridphoto who is getting incredible results with Ilford Pan F plus using a glycine <sp> based developer who scans with a drum scanner.

TMAX-400/2 is also a good choice if you need the speed.

Don Bryant

[Peter De Smidt]

I recommend Acros developed in one of the Pyrocat formulas.

[Ray Heath]

g'day Robin

i doubt that film choice is really what you need to consider

why don't you firstly attempt to define what are "the sharpest most detailed images"?

then consider how your perception of theses values relate to DOF, selective focus, bokeh, enlargement factors, presentation and the many other variables that determine image quality